Thanks for the comparison!

I took my 16-35 F4 IS and 70-200 2.8 IS to Beijing last week and although I got those nice wide angle and telephoto shots of the Summer Palace I wanted, I found myself constantly missing the all-in-one reach of my 24-105.

I'm a video guy, so I prefer to have one lens that does it all. Still, good to know that I have a sharp 16-35 when I need it.

I also find that the IS on the 16-35 F4 is not as powerful as it is on the 24-105 when doing video. Anyone know why that is?

By the way, these are what they call "Uptown problems"

StudentOfLight said:

Hi Steve, is the issue sorted?

Click to expand...

Hi StudentOfLight,

Definitely a lot better now, I did some testing in good light today and am pretty happy with the performance vs live view. I'm probably spoiled by some of the other lenses in my arsenal - just updated my profile with the full list. The fuji lenses at f1.2 to 1.4 are really sharp wide open so I'm probably setting the bar high for the 24 which is known to be a bit soft at f1.4

Mt Spokane Photography said:

The time between new models seems to be increasing. There is typically little difference other than a few features.

Canon has said that their high end point and shoot models are doing very well, particularly the super zooms. I expect to see more in the $500-$800 range.

Click to expand...

Are you referring to the G1X line or the SX line?

With tripod use and a measured approach 17 TS-E without question. Shift is a very valuable interior technique and the 17 TS-E is unmatched in this field in the 135 format.

If you want AF, IS etc I wouldn't know.

P.S. Interior spaces that are "square", that is the four walls are at 90º to each other, you miss a huge amount of wall space on the two closest walls where the camera has to be a few inches off the corner. More than 94º is important for record type images.

Could be. If they make a weather-sealed version that is shorter when closed (even if it's just a nonfunctional, heavily vignetted mess below 120mm with a pushbutton stop to prevent you from accidentally zooming it that wide), I'd be interested.

Now there's something I don't get. My 70–300L is 5.6" long, and that's barely practical to carry in a normal camera bag. How do people deal with carrying lenses that are half again longer than that when retracted? And why do manufacturers build lenses that are so impractical when it would be trivial to make them retract to a shorter length?

privatebydesign said:

RustyTheGeek said:

CR should come up with some kind of way to host photographers of this caliber from time to time.

Video, Blog, or whatever. I think it would be cool and really set CR apart from (and above) other rumor sites.

Click to expand...

Absolutely agree with that idea.

Click to expand...

Maybe the CR "Powers That Be" could impose on our new member, Captain Explorer to contact a few of his favorites and offer them some kind of incentive. 8)

Alrik89 said:

candyman said:

dgatwood said:

.................
Look at the lenses that Canon has updated in the past ten years and the age of the predecessor:

24–70 L II: 10 years
16–35 L II: 6 years
70–200 L II: 9 years
70–300 (L as an alternative to non-L): 5 years
300mm IS II: 11 years
400mm IS II: 12 years
500mm IS II: 12 years
600mm IS I: 12 years
24mm IS: 24 years
35mm IS: 22 years


Only those last two replaced lenses that were more than a decade old, and both of those were IS upgrades to previously non-IS lenses.

Click to expand...

I am not sure the 16-35 II has been updated .....Is the 16-35 f/4 IS really the update?....

Click to expand...

The 16-35mm II is the update of version I.
Whats wrong with you?

Click to expand...

O yeah, mondaymorning dip
you're right

rpt said:

wickidwombat said:

stick some black tape across each side of the VF?

yay another use for canons black tape!

Click to expand...

;D

What would we ever engineer without black tape (or duct tape)?

Click to expand...

+1 for DIY black tape masking.

Yup, exactly my point. What I've also read about MR-14EX I and II is that they tend to give flat light with no shades, which macro people don't really like (since it doesn't give them a nice 3D image). In contrast, it's very useful for medical/dental/pathological specialties, where people don't really want to have shades.

scottkinfw said:

Another thing to consider, and right off, I have no knowledge of any of the flashes discussed, however, I have a lot of clinical experience, and especially, medical photography experience. For what you do, you don't want a system that is difficult and that will require a lot of time and repeat shooting to get the right exposure. Your patients are not there for modeling purposes, and may not want to get their pics taken anyway. You want to get the shot ASAP and then get on with your work. Therefore, get the flash system that will get the job done efficiently.

Also, patients want you to pay attention to them, not the technology.

Just my 2 cents.

sek

Click to expand...

wsmith96 said:

Skywise said:

up-up-down-down-left-right-left-right-menu-play.

Click to expand...

F A T A L I T Y

lol

Click to expand...

I'm not sure why... but that reminds me... I want to play Milon's Secret Castle.

I am expecting my new Canon 10-18mm from Adorama any day now! Very excited to get my hands on this baby! The reviews I've seen have been glowing WRT IQ.

mackguyver said:

Phil L said:

This guy came up with a fresh caught blue crab in a South Carolina salt marsh yesterday evening.

Click to expand...

Nice one, Phil - looks like he's enjoying his meal! I heard/saw one eating a white crab of some kind at a distance - the sound is something, isn't it?

Click to expand...

Once you hear that crunch, it's a sound you won't soon forget.
I'm happy you liked the photo.

I liked that you got shots of them walking. That's always cool to see. It's probably about the closest thing we have to a living dinosaur.

Thanks for the replies, very helpful thoughts. I'll be contacting canon before I authorise the fix and may end up not feeding them this time.

I have also had very good experience with Aspen Creek Photo.

Additionally, Finnish cities have great support for bicycle travel, and that's actually quite handy and nice transportation method in the summer time - a bunch of people prefer it over cars and public transportation. If you think of doing that, you'll need to consider reducing the bag weight as much as you can.

Which is why I thought it would be better to know what are you planning to do?

Hmmmm. The 23 is starting to like a Goldilocks height for me......

sorry to say, but a bad shutter

To close the loop, I called Canon and got a very helpful gentleman who informed me that the loyalty program only applies to camera bodies and printers. There are no programs for lenses or speedlites.

I acquired some old lenses and was hoping that there might be a program for those. I'll be heading to craigslist to get rid of them.

Thanks,

-w

beckstoy said:

sagittariansrock said:

beckstoy said:

Hi everyone, I've only recently begun shooting with this method, and I'm totally LOVING the results I'm getting!

I'm wondering, however: I shoot using my 135L on a 5DM3. Does anyone here use the 85mm? I've noticed that with the 135, I'm shooting probably more photos than I need to, but that's because I'm scared I'm going to miss an area (those of you who shoot these photos know what I'm referring to).

Should I get an 85L just for this type of shot? I actually don't have one, but I'd love to have one. Maybe this is the catalyst to push me into that camp.

I've also tried it with my 70-200mm 2.8L m2 at approximately 85mm, but I'm more nervous because of the zoom ring.

Thoughts? Also, if you have good Brenizer Method photos, please share!

Click to expand...

One of the things Brenizer suggests is making sure you have the entire primary subject in one of the shots. This prevents any stitching issues within the main subject. It is very difficult to achieve that with the 135mm. So yes, I think an 85mm FL is necessary. You might be able to make do with a 50/1.2 or even better, the Sigma 85/1.4.
I am waiting for Canon to come up with the 85/1.4 USM (day-dreaming...)

Click to expand...

I'm with you there. I've noticed that it's tough to NOT include the subject in the follow-up shots when using the 135L. That's the primary reason I'm getting that 85.

One of the reasons I'm holding off slightly is to see what Sigma comes out with. Their new 50 and 35 are awesome (I use both and love them deeply), so I'm kinda holding out for their rumored 85 1.4 Art.

Click to expand...

I'm sure the 85 Art will be awesome. The Sigma 85 is already pretty great, adding firmware support to resolve focusing errors will remove the one Achilles heel.

Thanks everybody for the feedback.

I will probably get the 50" Westcott Apollo after I find a buyer for my 2008 13inch MacBook

neuroanatomist said:

Steve said:

neuroanatomist said:

But for BIF, M mode with Auto ISO is pretty close to ideal.

Click to expand...

That might be the case for the 1Dx but I can attest that full manual with a fixed ISO is better for BIF with a 1DIV or 7D. AutoISO is pretty wonky on those bodies. Also, unless I'm missing something, theres no exposure comp and shots against a bright sky will give you a very dark bird. I'm usually metering the sky and bumping between 1 and 2 full stops to get a proper exposure if I've got sky as a background. I guess you could spot meter, but its pretty tough keeping that center point on a moving bird.

Click to expand...

True. Also, 1-series bodies can link spot metering to the active AF point, so I can spot meter on the bird as AI Servo is tracking it (I usually use the 1+8 expansion point selection).

Click to expand...

I was also gonna to mention AF-linked spot-metering as well... . I hope it makes it into the 7D-II, and EC in manual mode. (Nikon has them and RGB metering in lower-than-pro-level bodies.) Then it's all down to how well you track the bird: large smooth-flyers easier, small erratic buggers not-so-easy. Ah well, nobody ever said BiF was gonna be easy.

Thank you all for the replies. I have 2 camera bags with lens dividers so that is what i was referring to. First time owning lenses that come with a case or bag and didnt know what to do with them! Looks like i will leave them at home.

l_d_allan said:

dstppy said:

Back to golf, if John Goodman was a terrible golfer and suddenly he was suddenly in the US Open after picking up a specific set of clubs, I may take interest and buy them.

Click to expand...

Or Charles Barkley?

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure he still hits better than I do. :

Hi Andy

I guess you can well start with the cheap case, just don't start with going under 30 meters
10 - 20 meters should be fine, if the case is supposed to be ok for 40 meters.
Just that you know, every meter you go deper, the less light you have. Below 15 meters, in clear water, you already have to crank up the ISO very high to have enough light to picture the moving animals, corals, ...

Regarding the filters, once you have a flash (or very strong LED torch) you don't need them anymore, as you have more or less full spectrum light which gives you the correct colors.
The S100 can make RAW images. Thanks to this you can fairly easely adjust the colors afterwards in your favorite image processing program. Otherwise put in the "underwater" mode, which also corrects the colors somewhat.
But as the camera doesn't know how deep you are, it can't really fix the color 100% right, same with a filter.

In any case, you safe all those problems (filters, after editing, high iso, unsharp images because of movement,...) with one flash. I own a Sea&Sea YS-01 (would buy the YS-D1 today).

RustyTheGeek said:

RLPhoto said:

5Dc - All my 600rt's - 24-105L + 50mm f/1.8'

That's pretty much all I would need.

Click to expand...

I like your style RL! I think we're on the same wavelength... if one were paring down, it would likely be due to finances so the most expensive stuff like $2K lenses and new bodies would go first.

That would indeed leave me with my 5Dc, etc. And I could live with that.

My kit would be similar to yours....

5Dc, 24-105L, 580EX-II, 16-35Lv1 and 15mm Fisheye. If I were lucky, I might be able to keep the 70-200 f/4 IS L too! I also wouldn't mind still having my trusty 28 f/1.8 Prime for low light and that could be instead of the FishEye if necc. This is essentially the gear that I felt super great working up to and using years ago and I'd do it again in a heartbeat.

Click to expand...

I'll manage without the newest tech but I'll keep my lighting gear.

On a funny note, a thread about slimming down gear when I just jumped into MF digital is quite ironic.